Some thoughts on the things I didn't work on much in Solo's draft.
__
I was starting work on a manifest/package document and wanted to plug in and
use syntax (particularly the references) from the Solo draft but I continue
to find the lack of a data model behind it to be very frustrating. Why are
somethings types and others values, and some values content? Was this
purposeful? (I don't recall) One can ask this from the point of view
syntactic consistency or from a datamodel point of view.
(1) For instance:
<dsig:signaturevalue value="dd2323dd"/>
signaturevalue is a node/resource that is somehow (anonymously) related to
signature with a property "value" and value "dd2323dd".
But why not:
<dsig:signaturevalue>dd2323dd</dsig:signaturevalue>
Signature value is a property of signature with value "dd2323dd". Makes much
more sense.
(2) Elsewhere:
<dsig:keyinfodata type="keyname"> 3 </dsig:keyinfodata>
keyinfodata is a resource that is somehow (anonymously) related to keyinfo.
keyinfodata has a property of "type" with a value "keyname". KeyInfoData is
also related to some literal "3" but I'm not sure how.
But why not:
<dsig:keyinfo>
<dsig:keyattributes>
<dsig:keyname>3</dsig:keyname>
<dsig:keyvalue>4</dsig:keyvalue>
<dsig:keyretrievalmethod>urn:DH</dsig:keyretrievalmethod>
</dsig:keyattributes>
</dsig:keyinfo>
keyinfo is a property that relates signature to keyattributes. keyattributes
has numerous properties (keyname, keyvalue) all with different values.
_________________________________________________________
Joseph Reagle Jr.
Policy Analyst mailto:reagle@w3.org
XML-Signature Co-Chair http://w3.org/People/Reagle/